Berube on Libya and the Left

Posted on 11/05/2011 by Juan

Michael Berube does a post-mortem on Libya and the Left, and what he finds is not a pretty picture. Woolly thinking, outrageous lies, moon-eyed Qaddafi-worship, false equivalences, and simplistic proxies for actual thought abound.

0 Retweet 0 Share 1 StumbleUpon 0 Printer Friendly Send via email

Posted in Uncategorized | 1 Comment

Israel’s Strangulation of Gaza by the Numbers

Posted on 11/05/2011 by Juan

The Israeli navy illegally interfered with Gaza aid ships on the high seas, Friday, kidnapping the people on the two vessels and sending the ships involuntarily to an Israeli port. The Geneva Convention of 1949 on people in occupied territories forbids their mistreatment.

Israel’s strangulation of Gaza by the numbers:

Truckloads of goods per year allowed by Israel into Gaza today: 1,000

Truckloads of goods per year allowed by Israel into Gaza in 2005: 2,500

Exports from Gaza to the rest of the world allowed by Israel: 0

Annual cost of the Israeli blockade to the Gaza economy: ~ $2 billion

Unemployment rate in Gaza, 2010: 37.4%

Percentage of households in Gaza living below the poverty line of $2 a day: 77%

Percentage of the 1.6 million Palestinians of Gaza who are minors: 50%

Percentage of households in Gaza that are food insecure: 61%

Percentage of Palestinian children in Gaza who are stunted from malnutrition: 15%

Percentage of Palestinian infants aged 3 months to one year who are anemic: 76%

Number of key medicines which have gone out of stock in Gaza because of the blockade and consequent money problems: 163

Percentage by which real per capita Gaza gross domestic product in 2011 is below per capita gdp of of 1993: 35%

0 Retweet 13 Share 55 StumbleUpon 0 Printer Friendly Send via email

Posted in Israel/ Palestine | 5 Comments

Would Obama Greenlight an Israeli Attack on Iran?

Posted on 11/04/2011 by Juan

The Israeli press notes that Israeli Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu and maverick Defense Minister Ehud Barak have been talking up a possible Israeli attack on Iran’s nuclear enrichment facilities.

No one knows if the two are just trying to create a threatening environment for Iran, in hopes of intimidating Tehran on a range of issues, or if they are preparing Israeli public opinion for an actual strike. The problem with talking big to scare an enemy, if that is the tactic, is that the talk can spiral into action whether one likes it or not. (This mistake was probably what got Gamal Abdel Nasser into the 1967 war: Israeli hawks such as Moshe Dayan took advantage of his saber rattling to launch an attack, which could be portrayed as preemptive.)

Former Israeli intelligence chief Meir Dagan revealed last spring that he and other security officials had forestalled a Netanyahu-Barak crazy scheme to hit Iran, about a year ago. Dagan said that an attack on Iran was “the stupidest thing I have ever heard.” He was worried that all the adults in the room had retired at once on the security side, leaving the inmates in charge of the asylum so to speak.

If what Dagan said is accurate, then it is entirely plausible that Netanyahu and Barak are up to their old tricks again. On the other hand, it is not clear that they could get their present security establishment to go along. Maariv reported in Hebrew on Nov. 3, according to the USG Open Source Center, that Barak has abysmal relations with his generals, including the chief of staff, Lt. Gen. Benny Gantz. The crisis of confidence extends, Maariv says, to Mossad or Israeli intelligence.

If this report is true, it may well be that Dagan’s successors will be impossible to convince on the wisdom of an Iran strike, just as he and his then peers were.

But I myself think that Netanyahu and Barak are bluffing, and have been using opposition from their security establishment as a convenient explanation for why they do not go beyond threats and innuendo.

A key consideration is that it is difficult to believe that Israel would dare launch such an attack without a green light from the Obama administration. Israel will need the US to resupply arms and spare parts if hostilities spiral out of control, and would like help with signals and other intelligence. An angered Obama could drag his feet on such help.

No such green light will be forthcoming while US troops are withdrawing from Iraq, because they will be especially vulnerable to attack at the hands of radical Shiites. Muqtada al-Sadr would likely relaunch his Mahdi Army for this purpose, and everyone in Washington knows this. Obama would not want convoys hit as they headed toward the Kuwaiti border. So the whole thing is out of the question until at least January.

Even after US troops are out of Iraq, the US will want to try to keep as much influence in Baghdad as it can. The Obama administration almost certainly realizes that an Israeli attack on Iran would willy-nilly push Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki into the arms of Tehran. Even the US embassy in Baghdad would be vulnerable to massive attack, especially once the troops are out. Al-Maliki supported Lebanon’s Hizbullah against Israel during the 2006 war, and would certainly adopt the same position in the event of another conflict, kicked off by a bombing of the Natanz facility. Al-Maliki’s Da’wa Islamiya or Islamic Call Party was partially responsible for the formation of Hizbullah in Lebanon in 1984.

Moreover, Iran can still make a lot of trouble for the US in Afghanistan, which Obama also wants to begin wrapping up, with a planned 30,000 troop reduction in the first half of 2012.

An Israeli attack on Iran would kill what is left of the Arab Spring. Syrians would be forced to rally behind Bashar al-Assad and his Iranian allies. Likely in Yemen as well, Ali Abdullah Saleh would use the attack to silence his opposition.

A budding Tehran-Baghdad-Damascus-Beirut axis would be brought to fruition and strengthened, creating a problem for the US from the Gulf to the Eastern Mediterranean.

Such an Israeli attack would certainly give the Muslim Brotherhood a fillip in the parliamentary elections, which the US would see as undesirable.

An Israeli attack on Iran would artificially put up the price of petroleum significantly for as long as hostilities continued, which in turn could push the US economy into a second dip recession and kill Obama’s chances of reelection.

Obama disapproves of adventurism. He was difficult to convince on the Libya War, and wants to be able to campaign on a calming Middle East, not one in flames. President Dwight Eisenhower was furious about the Israeli, British and French attack on Egypt in late October 1956 because it happened days before election day and made him look weak and not in control on foreign policy. For the same reason, Obama would be angered by an attack on Iran now that election season has begun.

So my own analysis suggests that there will be no American green light for Israeli adventurism regarding Iran.

0 Retweet 14 Share 31 StumbleUpon 4 Printer Friendly Send via email

Posted in Iran, Iraq, Israel/ Palestine, Lebanon, Syria | 76 Comments

A Hot Wet Thousand Years and 10 Green Energy Stories to Avert it

Posted on 11/03/2011 by Juan

The bad news is that I’ve been reading David Archer’s The Long Thaw on climate change projections, and he thinks that the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change has been way too conservative. As I understand him, his research shows that because of massive carbon emissions produced by human beings, by 2100 the average temperature of the earth’s surface will likely increase by 3 degrees C. But, he thinks that thereafter it will go on up another 2 degrees, for a total of 5 over the next few generations. The last time you had a climate 5 degree C. warmer than our prehistoric climate was the Eocene, 40 million years ago. All surface ice melted and the climate was tropical all the way to the poles.

We don’t actually know if there has ever been such a rapid increase in carbon in the atmosphere (there have been occasional periods in geological time when the earth warmed up similarly, as with the Eocene, but it is impossible to know at the moment over what time period that occurred). Human beings nowadays are carbon-spewers on steroids.

Archer argues that the dynamics of ocean water flows and the uncertainties of how quickly the oceans will absorb some of the extra carbon mean that the worst of the climate change effects will likely be delayed beyond 2100. Typically, sea level has risen 10-20 yards / meters for every increase of 1 degree in the surface temperature. So a 5 degree rise will eventually likely mean a sea level rise of 50 to 70 meters, which would cover a third more of the land mass than currently. The rise will take place over several centuries. Kevin Costner’s Waterworld may have been a bad film, but it might be good future history.

It will take about 100,000 years (the entire likely age of homo sapiens sapiens as a species) for the oceans and igneous rocks to wash the extra carbon out of the atmosphere.

Since the human species and human civilization arose under very different and significantly colder conditions, it is possible that a 5 degree rise in the average earth temperature over two or three centuries could lead to severe civilizational crisis and even extinction. On past evidence, the acidification of the oceans from carbon absorption will likely kill most marine life, a major human food source. And, human agricultural techniques assume large temperate zones.

Archer’s pessimism, beyond the IPCC conservative estimates also suggests a problem, which is that the worst catastrophes facing our species because of our current carbon binge may take place over centuries (apparently the first 1,000 years after the period of large carbon emissions will be the worst). If we can’t get people alarmed about 2100 because it is too far off (it is only a human lifetime off in fact), how can we excite them about 2500?

Well, we’re probably screwed. But the more we move to renewable energy in this generation, the less dramatic the millennial calamity. Archer’s worst case assumes that we’ll burn all the coal now known to exist. Friends, really. We don’t need to do that. James Hansen has suggested that coal burning should be a hanging crime, like horse stealing in the old West. Anyway, here are some slim reeds of hope:

1. Solar energy costs are falling so quickly that in a matter of a few years they will be competitive with hydrocarbons on a purely market basis. Controversy has attended the industry (especially in oil-and-gas-oriented America) because of government subsidies. But likely they won’t even be a question soon. On the other hand, it would be nice if the subsidies for petroleum, gas and coal were removed.

2. A solar power generation plant near Seville, Spain, started by Torresol (a joint venture of Spain’s Sener and Abu Dhabi’s Masdar) uses molten salt technology to generate power 24 hours a day. In this way the problem of “intermittency” (solar and wind power aren’t available 24 hours a day) is beginning to be addressed. The plant will supply electricity to 25,000 homes in Andalucia.

3. A German consortium is planning a $2 billion 500-megawatt solar plant in Morocco, with ground-breaking planned for 2012. It is a step toward a new North African electrical grid that may also supply Europe with 15% of its electricity by 2050. The 12-mile plant will use mirrors to run steam turbines rather than depending on photovoltaic cells. The Desertec Industrial Initiative, which includes Siemens, is also exploring putting a plant in newly democratizing Tunisia. DII intends that the plants should also supply electricity in the North African counties, as well as generating green jobs in countries that suffer from high unemployment.

4. Indonesia, with a large number of active volcanoes and more geothermal “hot spots” than any other country, is seeking to put in 9 gigawatts of geothermal electricity-generating plants by 2025 (roughly the equivalent of 9 nuclear power plants). Its biggest problem is attracting foreign investment for the $30 billion development, though recent changes in the law allowing foreign companies to operate as long as they have an Indonesian partner with at least 5% ownership, may help bring in money from abroad.

5. India is developing a new generation of small thorium nuclear reactors. These plants produce 400 megawatts of electricity but do not use uranium, the waste product of which can last thousands of years. Thorium wast might last only hundreds of years. India is relatively rich in thorium, and so far has few hydrocarbons such as petroleum and natural gas. The thorium nuclear plants will be a source of low-carbon energy.

6. Texas plans to double its wind power generation capacity by 2014, only 3 years from now.

7. India’s solar power costs are projected to fall by 40% over the next 4 years, making solar power generation competitive with India’s (limited) petroleum and gas industries, according to Reuters. India hopes to generate 20 gigawatts via solar plants by 2022, and plans to put $70 billion into fostering this outcome. At the moment, 70% of India’s electricity is generated by coal. The solar energy in India is expected to generate 100,000 jobs by 2022.

8. Solar energy is such a growing sector in Latin America that it is attracting substantial foreign investment.

9. South Africa, currently a big coal producer and consumer, is becoming a renewable energy investment hub. It has plans to produce nearly 4 gigawatts of power through renewables.

10. A new report from Transparency Market Research says that wind power generating capacity worldwide was only about 200 gigawatts in 2010, but will likely rise to 1,750 GW by 2030.

This projection is encouraging, but, alas, this isn’t nearly enough. The world consumes roughly 15,000 gigawatts (15 terawatts) of energy nowadays, generated by all its gadgets, most of them driven by hydrocarbons. All of that capacity needs to be replaced as soon as possible with green energy if we are to avoid the worst case scenarios for global warming. But with emerging nations like India coming on line and newly hungry for electricity and automobiles, the world will likely need 30,000 gigawatts or 30 terawatts by 2050. So about 2 terawatts from wind by 2030 is a drop in the bucket. Some scientists have argued that only solar energy has a prayer of meeting the needs of the world on this time scale.

0 Retweet 4 Share 30 StumbleUpon 1 Printer Friendly Send via email

Posted in Energy, Environment | 36 Comments

Likud Government takes Revenge on Palestinians for UNESCO Membership

Posted on 11/02/2011 by Juan

The Pan-Arab London daily, al-Hayat, editorializes today that President Obama’s vote against Palestine’s membership in UNESCO demonstrates that his 2009 Cairo speech was “empty words.” Obama’s forays into outreach to the Muslim world are crashing and burning as he adopts anti-Palestinian positions little different from those of his predecessors.

As for the far rightwing government of Binyamin Netanyahu in Israel, it announced that it was “punishing” Palestine for joining UNESCO. Since Israel isn’t Palestine’s parents, what he really means is that Israel is taking revenge. The vengeful measures consisted of building 2000 more dwellings for Israeli squatters on Palestinian land in and around East Jerusalem, and withholding from the Palestinians tens of millions of dollars a month in custom and sales tax revenue collected for the Palestine Authority at ports and checkpoints by the Israelis, which control them.

As I have asked before, if the Israelis are the good guys, why is it that their leadership so often sounds like a James Bond villain. (“No, Mr. Abbas, I expect you to drop dead.”)

Since the Israelis regularly announce new settlement building on Palestinian land in the West Bank, moreover, this “punishment” (“revenge”) is really just business as usual, and calling it punishment is nothing more than posturing.

Palestine declines to enter into further negotiations with Israel precisely because the Israelis are gobbling up the very land over which the negotiations would be held, so that the talks would really just offer a Palestinian fig leaf to Israeli grand larceny. The Palestinians can’t see why they should do that.

As for the customs revenue, the Israelis regular freeze those payments, and they have a third of the occupied Palestinians, in Gaza, under an ongoing blockade of civilians that prevents them from exporting their made goods and keeps most of them living in penury and on the edge of food insecurity.

In other words, if these measures are actually revenge, then the Israelis have been vengeful for many years toward the Palestinians.

Israel is also excluding UNESCO from that country, probably in a bid to prevent the organization from recognizing Palestinian sites as world heritage sites, strengthening the Palestinian claim to them and the territory on which they stand.

Former UK ambassador to Uzbekistan Craig Murray argues that Palestine can now join the International Criminal Court. Murray writes:

“… the UNESCO membership is crucial recognition of Palestine’s statehood, not an empty gesture. With this evidence of international acceptance, there is now absolutely no reason why Palestine cannot, instantly and without a vote, join the International Criminal Court. Palestine can now become a member of the International Criminal Court simply by submitting an instrument of accession to the Statute of Rome, and joining the list of states parties.

As both the USA and Israel refuse to join the ICC because of their desire to commit war crimes with impunity, acceding to the statute of Rome would not only confirm absolutely that Palestine is a state, it would reinforce the fact that Palestine is a better international citizen with more moral legitimacy than Israel.

There is an extremely crucial point here: if Palestine accedes to the Statute of Rome, under Article 12 of the Statute of Rome, the International Criminal Court would have jurisdiction over Israelis committing war crimes on Palestinian soil. Other states parties – including the UK – would be obliged by law to hand over indicted Israeli war criminals to the court at the Hague. This would be a massive blow to the Israeli propaganda and lobbying machine.”

It is often said that the ICC cannot move against non-signatories. But since the Israelis are operating in Palestinian territory in the West Bank and Gaza, they thereby open themselves to prosecution were Palestine to join the ICC.

The Human Province blog has a complete vote tally for the UNESCO decision. It turns out that Spain, France, Ireland, Austria, Finland and Greece in Europe voted “yes,” which is a pretty big set of defections from US leadership. And, the UK, Italy and Denmark all abstained, which given the way this vote worked, essentially supported the Palestinians.

“No” votes were Australia, Canada, Czech Republic, Germany, Israel, Lithuania, the Netherlands, Palau, Panama, Samoa, Solomon Islands, Sweden, United States of America, Vanuatu.

With all due respect to the island nations, they aren’t very important in world affairs. Germany, Canada and Australia are the only medium-sized countries here, while Sweden, the Czech Republic and the Netherlands are relatively small despite being wealthy. The Rejectionist states toward Palestine are no longer very numerous or weighty, and mostly they are just being arm-twisted by the US to give Washington cover so that it doesn’t look like the US is the only one standing against basic Palestinian human rights.

As for the fall-out for the United States, an informed reader wrote to remind me that if the Palestinians are welcomed into other UN bodies, the US could well lose substantial influence and have its interests adversely affected. He notes that the International Telecommunication Union allocates radio spectrum usage globally, “including the spectrum reserved for military and commercial use.” The World Health Organization is clearly important to the US for combating epidemics. The World Meteorological Organization is a matrix of information about weather that has agricultural and military implications. The World Intellectual Property Organization recognizes patents and copyrights worldwide.

These sorts of UN organizations, which are, whether Americans want to recognize it or not, important to the United States, could be forced to expel the US and cease sharing information with it if it does not pay its dues. Congress in the 1990s, under the influence of the Israel lobbies, passed a law forbidding the US government from giving money to bodies that recognize Palestine.

The upshot: Netanyahu’s talk about “punishment” (“revenge”) seems likely to inspire buyers’ remorse in countries like Sweden and Australia that voted against the Palestinians at UNESCO, and reinforces the very image of Israel as regional bully that led to the vote in the first place. Obama’s vote against the Palestinians has cost him significant political capital in the Muslim world. And, the US now could face a series of debilitating expulsions from a whole range of essential international organizations.

The US and Israel are experiencing these setbacks because both are de facto supporting Greater Israel expansionism, which is illegal in international law. Ironically, there are very unlikely to be enough Israelis actually to displace the Palestinians from the West Bank, and they are probably just paving the way for a one-state solution after a few decades of Apartheid that likely will result in boycotts of Israel.

0 Retweet 7 Share 32 StumbleUpon 1 Printer Friendly Send via email

Posted in Israel/ Palestine | 23 Comments

Romney Flip-Flops on Mideast, Too: Cole in Truthdig

Posted on 11/02/2011 by Juan

My column is out in Truthdig, entitled, “Mitt Romney’s Big Bad Ideas for the Middle East”.

Excerpt:

“The Arab revolutions of 2011 have already removed three dictators and forced governments across the region to abolish draconian states of emergency. Tunisia has had free and fair parliamentary elections, and Egypt’s are scheduled to begin in late November. What is Romney’s response to these epochal events? “We’re facing an Arab Spring which is out of control in some respects because the president was not as strong as he needed to be in encouraging our friends to move toward representative forms of government,” he says.

Romney has conveniently forgotten that as late as Feb. 1 of this year, he was on CNN saying, “I probably would avoid the term ‘dictator’ in referring to Egypt’s Hosni Mubarak.” He was more generous to his predecessors then, not seeking to blame Mubarak’s non-dictatorship (1981-2011) on Obama. Instead, he said, “Over many administrations in this country, we’ve encouraged President Mubarak to move in the direction of providing … freedoms.”

Read the whole thing.

0 Retweet 0 Share 1 StumbleUpon 0 Printer Friendly Send via email

Posted in Uncategorized, US Politics | 8 Comments

UNESCO Palestine Vote Isolates US Further

Posted on 11/01/2011 by Juan

The United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization recognized Palestine as a full member on Monday setting off a crisis between the United States and the United Nations that seems likely to further isolate Washington in the world and reduce its influence.

The UNESCO vote could start an avalanche of such acceptances among various UN bodies. Although Palestine is unlikely now to get a majority next month at the UN Security Council, there is always next year. And the admission of Palestine by large numbers of UNO organizations might anyway have a similar effect to a UNSC majority vote.

Countries such as Norway and Ireland have signaled that they would like to raise Palestinian representation to full embassy status, and every international vote like the UNESCO one encourages them further in this direction. In turn, embassy status could begin giving Palestine standing in some countries to sue Israel in third-country courts for torts such as land and water usurpation.

Since a law passed by Congress in the 1990s forbids the US from funding UN bodies that recognize Palestine, the Obama administration has no choice but to withdraw the $80 million a year it gives UNESCO, which is a fifth of the agency’s budget. But what this step really means is that the US loses influence over UNESCO, and indeed, it might well lose its membership in the organization. UNESCO may have to close some offices and lose employees. Or someone else, such as Saudi Arabia or China, might pick up the $80 million, gaining influence over UNESCO at US expense.

If the move becomes common, the US could end up further and further isolated and helpless. What if the International Atomic Energy Agency recognizes Palestine as a member? If the US cuts it off, it loses a key arena within which it has been pressuring Iran over its nuclear enrichment program. And so on and so forth.

The overwhelming influence in the US Congress of the Israel lobbies (including those of the Christian Zionists) are leading the US down a path of increasing international isolation and weakness. The US vote against Palestine is the headline on the Arab satellite television news programs, and even in India and Russia it is a vote that makes the US look like an ogre.

The UNESCO vote was 107 for, 14 against, and 52 abstentions; 14 were absent. The vote had to be won by a two-thirds majority of states voting “yes” or “no.” Thus, to abstain in this situation was more or less to help the Palestinians win.

That voting pattern, in turn, reveals the shape of US influence in the world. The vote was not simply the West versus the Rest. Although Latin America, Africa and Asia strongly supported Palestinian membership, so too in the end did France. And Britain and Italy abstained rather than voting against. The rising BRIC bloc, of Brazil, Russia, India, and China all voted for. There appear only to be about 14 pro-Zionist countries left in the world, 12 beyond the United States and Israel itself.

The Israeli ambassador to UNESCO called the vote “science fiction,” since, he said, it recognized an imaginary state. The old Israeli inability to see the 11 million-strong Palestinian people as a nation-state, which once led Israeli consuls in the US to promote letter-writing campaigns against US newspapers that even used the word “Palestinian” in their stories, is obviously still intact.

More important, UNESCO recognition of Palestinian cultural monuments as world heritage sites could well complicate the slow Israeli theft of Palestinian territory on the West Bank and in and around Jerusalem. That usurpation of land and resources is made possible because the Israelis engineered the statelessness, i.e. the national homelessness, of the Palestinians.

Palestine had been scheduled by the League of Nations for statehood, as a Class A Mandate, and as late as 1939 the British government was pledging a Palestinian state within a decade. The ethnic cleansing campaign of militant members of the Yishuv in Palestine and then by Israelis led to the expulsion of 700,000 or so Palestinians from their homes. But they didn’t just become refugees, losing all their property. They became stateless. Statehood is the right to have rights. Palestinians not only have no rights, they don’t have the right to have them. That is why the Israeli pledges to them in the Oslo peace process could be reneged on so easily. Palestinians are the nobodies of the Levant, the non-entities, the marks and fall guys.

The vote demonstrates again the sea change that has taken place in the international community regarding the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. I believe that there are several reasons for this change:

1. Everyone can see that the Israeli government of PM Yitzhak Rabin made undertakings to the Palestinians as part of the Oslo peace accords, such as withdrawal from the West Bank, on which the Israelis reneged.

2. The Israeli attack on Lebanon in 2006 made it look like a reckless bully.

3. The Israeli blockade of basic necessities for Palestinian non-combatants and children in the Gaza Strip from 2007 made the Israelis look heartless.

4. The Israeli attack on little Gaza in 2008-2009, where 40 percent of the population is camp-dwelling refugees whose families were expelled from what is now Israel in 1947-1948, made Israel look like a reckless bully.

5. The Israeli attack on the Turkish aid ship the Mavi Marmara on May 31, 2010, in which commandos killed 9 persons, one an American citizen, made Israel look like a reckless bully.

6. Constant Israeli announcements of expanded settlements on Palestinian territory are widely seen as breaking international law, as well as a form of theft.

Disgust with these Israeli policies of continually victimizing the Palestinians is so widespread and deep that even Germany has just threatened to cancel the delivery to Israel of a submarine because of the announcement of settlements in Arab east Jerusalem. Germany, for understandable historical reasons, almost never criticizes Israel. But the Likud attempt to expel Palestinians from their long-time homes in Jerusalem has pushed even Berlin to criticize the policy publicly.

It isn’t just the world community that is dismayed at the setting in of long-term Israeli Apartheid. Even the widow of Israeli war hero Moshe Dayan now laments,

“I’m a peacemaker, but the current Israeli government does not know how to make peace. We move from war to war, and this will never stop. I think Zionism has run its course.”…

“Today we use foreign labor to work in Israel because Palestinians are not allowed. And this continuous expansion of the settlements everywhere-—I cannot accept it. I cannot tolerate this deterioration in the territories and the roadblocks everywhere. And that horrible wall! It’s not right.”

Aljazeera English reports on the UNESCO vote:

0 Retweet 17 Share 77 StumbleUpon 0 Printer Friendly Send via email

Posted in Israel/ Palestine | 31 Comments

Mahoney: New Leadership in Kyrgyzstan Fateful for US Bases in Central Asia

Posted on 11/01/2011 by Juan

Jon Mahoney writes in a guest column for Informed Comment

Many readers of Informed Comment will be interested in the outcome of the presidential elections in Kyrgyzstan held on October 30th. With 99% of votes counted, AP and other news sources are reporting that Alzambek Atambaev received 63% of of the votes, well above the 50% required to forestall a run-off. This result is quite surprising to most. Though Atambaev was the clear front runner, in the run up to Sunday’s election it was widely assumed that no candidate would receive more than 50% of the votes. Two of Atambaev’s most serious challengers, Kamchibek Tashiev and Adakhan Madumarov each received less than 15%; both candidates are currently challenging the results. In an effort to highlight some things to look out for in the near future, this post provides some (by no means complete) background to the current political situation in Kyrgyzstan.

With a population of 5.5 million (approximately 65% Kyrgyz, 14% Uzbek and a number of other ethnic groups including Russians and Uyghurs) Kyrgyzstan has had two revolutions since Russian independence in 1991; the first in 2005 and the second in 2010. This political instability is in stark contrast to neighboring Uzbekistan (ruled by a world class thug, Islam Karimov) and Kazakhstan (ruled by an autocrat Nursultan Nazarbayev). Kyrgyzstan also experienced significant ethnic conflict in June of 2010, several months after the 2010 revolution. According to a 2011 report by the Kyrgyzstan Independent Commission (KIC) approximately 470 people were killed during several days of violence in southern Kyrgyzstan (Osh and Jalal Abad in particular); most victims were Uzbeks. Many suspected of involvement in these events have been subject to harassment and torture. In Osh, many businesses and homes owned by Uzbeks are still in ruins and to this day there is a large group of displaced Uzkek citizens (some in Uzbekistan, some in Kyrgyzstan).

Roza Otunbayeva, (a former philosophy professor and longtime political actor) was appointed interim president after the 2010 revolution; she was not a candidate for the presidential election. Many observers characterize Otunbaeva as a well-intentioned yet mostly powerless political force. This past spring Otunbaeva was given the “Women of Courage” award by the U.S. Department of State; steely eyed readers will rightly wonder if the U.S. Transit Center at Manas near the Kyrgyz capital, Bishkek, has something to do with this.

In addition to ongoing and unresolved tension between Kyrgyz and Uzbek citizens, economic factors are also relevant to understanding instability in Kyrgyzstan. Fuel supplies to the Americans at Manas have in the past been major source of personal prosperity for past Kyrgyz presidents (e.g. Akaev who ruled from 1991-2005 and Bakiev who ruled from 2005-2010). Moreover, the gold mining industry (here Kumtor stands above all other mining corporations, providing between 7-20% of the Kyrgyz GDP–the numbers depend on who does the reporting, and no doubt, accounting) will likely be a central factor in political developments for the foreseeable future. Personal income for most Kyrgyz citizens is very sparse. For instance, primary school teachers often earn less than 50$ a month and for many Kyrgyz citizens the most promising career path is that of a seasonal worker in Russia.

Up to this point, religion has not been a major factor in Kyrgyz politics. Though approximately 75-80% of Kyrgyz citizens self-identify as Muslims, few are devout and public life in Kyrgyzstan can hardly be characterized as having serious religious elements. Some in the Kyrgyz government will claim that there is a rising threat of political Islam yet this should probably be construed as a canard by those who want to ignore real problems (e.g. ethnic tension between Kyrgyz and Uzbek citizens) and to flatter the Western powers who are more likely to both offer foreign aid and overlook political repression when exercised in the name of combatting radical Muslims. Political discourse is often littered with dangerous yet junk phrases such as “foreign elements.” For example, when I spoke with Kyrgyz academics who also work for the Kyrgyz government at a conference this past summer I was told that among the “external factors” that pose a threat to political stability are Baptists who seek converts and militant Islamists with guns stoking the flames of ethnic conflict. These kinds of claims would be on the laughable end of the spectrum were they not so widespread.

Kyrgyzstan matters to the United States. Manas airbase is a major transit center for the war in Afghanistan. Kyrgyzstan is also the only country that “has the pleasure” of hosting both Russian and American military bases (Russia has facilities both in Kant, about 25 kilometers east of Bishkek, as well as in Osh, Kyrygzstan’s second largest city, located in the south). Atambaev has been courted by the Putin government and stated earlier this summer that were he elected he would not renew the lease for the American transit center at Manas; he repeated these claims about Manas in the past few days.

Worries by the American government about the future of Manas is likely one of the factors (this is overlooked by mainstream media sources due to all the focus on the soured relations between the U.S. and Pakistan) that explains Hillary Clinton’s recent trip to Uzbekistan. Tthe U.S. had had a military presence in Uzbekistan in the early stages of the Afghan war yet this ended when Karimov expelled the Americans after the U.S. criticized his regime for a violent crackdown on student protesters in 2005–the “Andijan Massacre”. There is also pressure on Kyrgyzstan to join the Customs Union with Russia, Kazakhstan and Belarus. Were this to happen, Western powers, mainly the United States, would likely apply counter pressure, either with threats of financial sanctions under the guise of violating WTO agreements or with a treat in the form of increased foreign aid, in exchange for not joining the Union.

In the immediate aftermath of the elections, some factors that may have a significant effect on political events include: a more pronounced division between those who identify themselves as “northern” and “southern”; rising Kyrgyz ethnic nationalism; efforts at foreign investment by companies with interests in mining and hydroelectric power; and efforts by the United States, Russia and to a lesser extend China to increase their influence in Kyrgyzstan and in Central Asia. The “north-south” division may well be a more prominent factor in the short term. Both Tashiev and Mudumarov are widely perceived to be “southern” politicians and each is capable of mobilizing supporters for street protests, should they choose to do so. As of this morning Radio Free/Radio Liberty is reporting that 1,000 Tashiev were blocking the Bishkek-Osh highway near the southern Kyrgyz city of Jalal Abad. Regardless of how conflicts over the election are resolved, it is reasonable to predict that from a longer term perspective ethnic nationalism and conflicts over how to promote economic development will remain key sources of conflict.

REFERENCES:

The final report on the June 2010 violence by the Kyrgyzstan Independent Commission can be found here.

Readers can also check out the following English language news sources:

Eurasianet (a Soros site devoted to news on Central Asia).

Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty.

Two recent books with insightful analysis include:

Dilip Hiro, Inside Central Asia (London, Overlook Duckworth, 2009)

Eric McGlinchey, Chaos, Violence, Dynasty: Politics and Islam in Central Asia (Pittsburg, Pittsburg University Press, 2011).
———-

Jon Mahoney, Associate Professor of Philosophy, Kansas State University. From January-July, 2011 Jon was a Fulbright scholar at the American University of Central Asia, Bishkek, Kyrgyz Republic.

0 Retweet 0 Share 5 StumbleUpon 1 Printer Friendly Send via email

Posted in Central Asia, Uncategorized | 3 Comments